A big breakthrough on green jobs 8

The New York State Senate and Assembly, too often a model of corruption and dysfunctionality, rose above petty politics last week to pass forward-thinking legislation on climate and energy, setting a precedent for bipartisanship and a sensible cap and trade system.  The State Senate passed the groundbreaking Green Job/Green New York Act, with strong support from Republicans, Democrats, and the Working Families Party, which spearheaded the legislation. The bill—expected to be signed into law this week by Gov. David Patterson—leverages $112m in revenue from the Northeasts’s Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) into $5 billion of private investment to finance home weatherization, energy efficiency projects, and green jobs creation.

We should all be paying closer attention for three reasons:

1) It is one of the first large-scale pieces of legislation that concreteley demonstrates why green jobs are a win-win-win. Homeowners win by reducing their energy costs. The private sector wins by gaining a safer investment with strong expected returns. And New Yorkers benefit through the creation of 16,000 new jobs and the increased economic activity and tax receipts the program will generate.  It’s a blueprint that can work in other states and regions as well.

2) It’s also a model for sensible national climate and energy policy. While the version of the American Clean Energy & Securities Act that passed in the House gives away a substantial portion of the pollution allowances to utilities, the RGGI program in the Northeast auctions off the credits creating the $112 million in revenue, which the state is leveraging 50x to create new jobs and save homeowners on their heating and electricity bills. 

3) Finally, the Green Job/Green New York Act highlights the power of bipartisan efforts to achieve common sense solutions. Republican support is what made the bill possible. Rather than fight any effort for sensible policy like the national Republican leadership, local leaders have proven to be in touch with the concerns of their constituents, helping to pass the bill 52-8 in the Senate and 147-0 in the Assembly. But putting politics aside and the needs of New Yorkers first, they showed the way for national cooperation on this issue.

To learn more about the bill and its passage, check out David Sasson’s piece on SolveClimate.org.

Billy Parish is co-founder and coordinator of the Energy Action Coalition. Billy has taken four years off from Yale, where he was co-chair of the Yale Student Environmental Coalition and was majoring in Ethics, Politics & Economics. Billy was a 2004 Brower Youth Award Winner, 2005 Rolling Stone “Climate Hero,” Mother Jones magazine’s 2006 “Student Activist of the Year,” and was recently named a fellow by Ashoka, the global association of the world’s leading social entrepreneurs. A co-author of the report “New Energy for Campuses,” a guide for colleges and universities on how to cost-effectively cut their greenhouse gas emissions, Billy works to train students and equip them with the tools they need to implement local climate solutions. A native of New York City, Billy now works out of the Washington D.C. office of the Energy Action Coalition.

Related Stories

Advertisement
Advertisement

  1. Wordy Allen Posted 6:53 pm
    14 Sep 2009

    On the first reasonm you forgot to mention the "win" for the environment.   Isn't that kind of an important benefit?

    Permalink

  2. skitters Posted 7:27 am
    15 Sep 2009

    i think the environmental benefits are kind of a given. In ONtario, Canada jsut passed the Green Energy Act, an all encompassing piece of energy legislation that trys to takcle global warming, energy security, and green jobs all in one shot. Sadly its a flawed piece of .... I htink NY state had the right idea. Pass smaller bills that are relative to the issue at hand. We need some of that pragmatism in the ONtario legislature.

    Permalink

  3. skitters Posted 7:28 am
    15 Sep 2009

    i think the environmental benefits are kind of a given. In ONtario, Canada jsut passed the Green Energy Act, an all encompassing piece of energy legislation that trys to takcle global warming, energy security, and green jobs all in one shot. Sadly its a flawed piece of .... I htink NY state had the right idea. Pass smaller bills that are relative to the issue at hand. We need some of that pragmatism in the ONtario legislature.

    Permalink

  4. vbstenswick Posted 11:08 pm
    15 Sep 2009

    I am as green as anyone, but care must be taken on the claims of jobs gained.  Yes, we might gain jobs installing solar panels, yet lose other jobs because we drove the electricity rates too high.  We will not necessarily lose jobs if everyone one has to operate under the same handicaps--i.e. we must reduce our GHG emissions.  Therefore we need to press Congress to enact meaningful GHG limiting legislation, and impose tariffs on nations that do not cap their emissions immediately.  I do not think we have time for any 'bleeding heart liberal' nonsense about letting China and India raise their standards of living.  GHG emissions have to be limited now, worldwide.  Everyone also has to understand that China and India are no different than us, they will have powerful people who will get even wealthier and use the pretext of raising the standard of living for the masses so that they can become more powerful.  The masses, here and abroad, are the ones that stand to lose the most since they will not have the resources to comfortably relocate away from the coasts as the oceans rise.  Congress should also authorize the President to use the navy to throttle China and India's oil supply should tariffs fail to entice them to cut their GHG emissions.

    Permalink

    1. Tasermons Partner Posted 10:18 am
      16 Sep 2009

      That would be pretty stupid.And for more reasons than you think. China and India get large portions of the oil via overland pipeline, so use of Navy wouldn't accomplish much, 'cept maybe war and loss of american lives, of course.

      Permalink

      1. vbstenswick Posted 6:55 pm
        16 Sep 2009

        Tariffs should be used first.  Using logic and reason with people who stand to become filthy rich by destroying the planet is probably not a good strategy.  Moral persuasion with people who are immoral does not work.

        Permalink

      2. vbstenswick Posted 3:15 am
        17 Sep 2009

        We are supposed to sit back and cut our GHG emissions while they increase theirs??  I do not know all of the means that China and India obtain their oil, but we are a much more open society than theirs, and look at the difficulty we have in getting the facts straight.  I really doubt that China and India would ignore increasing tariffs on their goods and services by Europe and the US.  All the jobs that migrated to China would migrate somewhere else as Nicaragua, Mexico, Vietnam raced to cap their GHG emissions so as to avoid tariffs.  China and India would follow suit, but I doubt it will happen without leverage.  Who precisely is going to pay if the subways of NYC are flooded?  We could just not pay the Chinese back for all the money they have loaned us. 

        Permalink

  5. mshak Posted 11:07 am
    16 Sep 2009

    Thanks Billy. It is rather remarkable that New York State actually has something to be rather proud of, and this recent legislation will move us all in the right direction. NYS has been a role model for innovative programs and solutions addressing energy issues as well as greenhouse gases, despite all the political antics. Glad to see some good work is finally getting done in Albany. It's about time we had something to smile about!Upstate NY

    Permalink

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Viewed
More
Commented
More
Advertisement